首页> 外文期刊>Perspectives in Clinical Research >Comparison of efficacy and pharmacoeconomics of two helicobacter pylori eradication regimens in peptic ulcer disease
【24h】

Comparison of efficacy and pharmacoeconomics of two helicobacter pylori eradication regimens in peptic ulcer disease

机译:两种幽门螺杆菌根除方案在消化性溃疡疾病中的疗效和药物经济学比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Helicobacter pylori, the cause of most peptic ulcer diseases, infects approximately 50% of the population worldwide. Indian data on cost and effectiveness of the standard first-line therapies for H. pylori eradication are scarce. Thus, the present study was aimed at comparing the cost and efficacy of two standard first-line therapies: Regimen I comprising pantoprazole (40 mg) plus amoxicillin (750 mg) plus clarithromycin (500 mg) (PAC) and Regimen II comprising rabeprazole (20 mg) plus amoxicillin (625 mg) plus metronidazole (200 mg) (RAM). Methodology: This prospective, observational, bottom-up study collected demographic, economic, diagnostic, and therapeutic data from 60 H. pylori-positive patients. The study was carried out for 6 months in the Gastroenterology Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Hyderabad, Telangana, India. Results: Health-care system perspective was used to account for direct costs. Average cost per patient for complete H. pylori eradication was Rs. 10,221 and Rs. 8568 for Regimen I and Regimen II, respectively. Inpatient cost was considerably higher than the outpatient cost. Diagnostic costs ranked first in direct costs, followed by hospitalization costs, medication costs, and finally, physician's office visit cost. Individual patient's costs difference between two regimens was found to be statistically significant. Overall, Regimen I proved to be more efficacious than Regimen II, but Regimen II proved to be more cost-effective than Regimen I. Furthermore, incremental cost-effectiveness analysis revealed additional cost of Rs. 127 per patient if the patient was treated with Regimen I instead of Regimen II. Conclusion: Our study showed that Regimen II (RAM) was more cost-effective than Regimen I (PAC), but PAC achieved faster H. pylori eradication than RAM. We assume that this study provides local clinical data as to which regimen may be useful in a particular patient. National Level Clinical Trials are required to further ascertain this conclusion.
机译:背景:幽门螺杆菌是大多数消化性溃疡疾病的病因,感染了全球约50%的人口。关于幽门螺杆菌根除标准一线疗法的成本和有效性的印度数据很少。因此,本研究旨在比较两种标准的一线疗法的成本和疗效:包含潘托拉唑(40 mg)加阿莫西林(750 mg)加克拉霉素(500 mg)(PAC)的方案I和包含雷贝拉唑(rabeprazole)的方案II 20 mg)加阿莫西林(625 mg)加甲硝唑(200 mg)(RAM)。方法:这项前瞻性,观察性,自下而上的研究收集了60例幽门螺杆菌阳性患者的人口统计学,经济,诊断和治疗数据。该研究在印度特兰甘纳邦海德拉巴的三级医院消化内科进行了6个月。结果:使用卫生保健系统的观点来计算直接费用。彻底根除幽门螺杆菌的每位患者平均费用为卢比。 10,221和卢比。方案I和方案II分别为8568。住院费用大大高于门诊费用。诊断费用在直接费用中排名第一,其次是住院费用,药物费用,最后是医师就诊费用。发现两种方案之间的个体患者费用差异具有统计学意义。总体而言,I类方案被证明比II类方案更有效,但II类方案却比I类方案更具成本效益。此外,成本效益分析表明,Rs方案的成本更高。如果患者接受I方案而不是II方案治疗,则每位患者127。结论:我们的研究表明,II型方案(RAM)比I型方案(PAC)具有更高的成本效益,但PAC根除幽门螺杆菌的速度比RAM方法更快。我们假设这项研究提供了关于哪种疗法可能对特定患者有用的本地临床数据。需要国家级临床试验来进一步确定该结论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号